|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 02:44 PM EDT |
Baker is completely different. Quoting from the decision:
"The defendant uses a similar plan so far as results are concerned, but
makes a different arrangement of the columns, and uses different
headings."
"The evidence of the complainant is principally directed to the object of
showing that Baker uses the same system as that which is explained and
illustrated in Selden's books. It becomes important, therefore, to determine
whether, in obtaining the copyright of his books, he secured the exclusive right
to the use of the system or method of bookkeeping which the said books are
intended to illustrate and explain."
"But there is a clear distinction between the book as such and the art
which it is intended to illustrate."
This case is different. Here Google copied an API, verbatim, as a preliminary
step to implementing the API. That is equivalent to copying the book, and IMO,
a copyright violation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|